[Captivate General] rbtconsultants:
OK, this is just my opinion, but I believe that all the people that have been castrating Samsung about the updates are generally wrong, and that ATT was where things were being held up.

So, it's easy to castrate ATT for that but, really, it's easy for people that don't understand software/product support to pass judgement. Most people assume that ATT delayed things for commercial reasons so they could bloat/cripple the software. That may very well be true, but is it the only reason?

Assuming there are a couple million captivates out there, maybe ATT wanted to make sure they were able and ready to support the update of a couple million phones by generally retarded consumers that were going to create a huge demand spike for support when the upgrade was released?

Being in the software business, I know that software rollouts are not simply a matter of the software being ready. Having an infrastructure/ecosystem in place to support the software once it's rolled out is often as challenging as developing the software, and often just because the software is ready doesn't mean the business is ready to roll it out and support it. It may be as elementary as making sure you have enough capacity in your call centers to take the additional end-user support call volume generated by the update.

So, it's logical for me to believe that ATT set up an infrastructure and a plan that was implemented to support rollout of updates. It's also logical to assume that plan was intended so that the day it "went live" it enabled them to support multiple phone updates. The timing could certainly encompass dependencies/considerations on other elements of their business/infrastructure, including seemingly unrelated (to us) elements like support for tethering, etc.

I'm not necessarily defending all of these companies practices, and I really do think their communication could be better, but let's face it. Sometimes they are caught between a rock and a hard place. If they roll out something before they are ready they get berated because they released prematurely (see IPhones and network capacity and one reason so many people ***** about ATT). Or some updates fail and some phones get bricked and bloggers jump on them and try to ruin their reputation (see the recent WP7 first update). Or they try to communicate and people want specific dates and complain if they don't get them (see recent SamsungJohn/XDA debacle). If a date slips because of some unforeseen reason, people hold their feet to the fire over it.

So, is it coincidence that the Captivate and Aria updated at the same time, along with some other business elements like tethering? Probably not. Does it imply something insidious? Maybe, but I tend to believe it was along the lines of their project/implementation timelines based on the things they needed to put into place to support their customers and manage their business plans.

People, in general, VASTLY underestimate the amount of work that is required to set up an ecosystem to support end-users and roll out and release software/products.

Can Samsung and ATT do a better job of communicating? Absolutely, especially as it relates to the XDA audience. But consider this: maybe, from their business perspective, the number of people that ***** on the Internet are a miniscule (albeit very visible to us) percentage of their business/customers and although they are willing to spend some time to cater to that element, maybe their willingness only extends out a little bit because they think it only affects their business a little bit.

Just my $.02.

Bob